Post, Sam Rainsy has given evidence to the courts he claims implicates Foreign Minister Hor Namhong in Khmer Rouge atrocities. This is the latest development in a legal battle launched by Namhong after Rainsy publicly alleged that the official oversaw activities at Boeung Trabek prison.
Whatever happens with this particular dispute, its existence is illustrative of a larger truth about the tribunal: The court will never come close to trying all those involved in Khmer Rouge-era crimes.
As civil party Theary Seng said in our recent Radio Australia discussion: "Five (prosecutions) isn't enough; thousands are not practical."
However, UN experts had proposed more practical numbers in 1999: 20 to 30 defendants. The prime minister promptly rejected this suggestion.
Given the tribunal's pace and financial struggles, it seems inevitable that the scope of prosecutions will remain limited. While a few more defendants may be charged by the court, the total number of prosecutions is unlikely to exceed seven or eight.
" />

Rainsy says he has proof official guilty of KR-era crimes

Which has made me wonder, how should lingering suspicions of former Khmers Rouge be handled? In some countries, domestic courts have tried suspects who fall outside the scope of international law. But given the weak state of Cambodia's judiciary, this does not seem like a very appealing solution. Perhaps a version of the truth and reconciliation process would be a better option?

Latest Video

With an attempted coup against the government of President Recep Erdogan quashed only days ago and more than 7,000 alleged conspirators now under arrest, the Turkish ambassador to Cambodia yesterday pressed the govern